|
|
Ok so I've been pretty much always shooting with digital bodies (Nikon D1X + D2X) but I've been aching to do film lately.
I really want to start using film again and I'd like to know what kind of films I should use for B&W stuff and landscapes (high saturation...vivid colors). If you have any films you like, post along. I've used elitechrome in the past and some ilford stuff too...
I'll most likely pick up a Minolta XG-9 and a Hi-Matic S2 because my X700 is broken (leaver is stuck) and I hate the lens on my Canon Elan II.
weeee
"Toyota vehicles are marketed to people who would be more excited about getting a new fridge than a new car I think." -Bandi | |
I am sure I'm not the only one here who likes the Efke/Adox brand of B&W film for urban decay and architectural photography. It is a classic German formula with a high silver content typical of '50s films, so you do get a classic look as well that I really can't describe in words. The mid-tones are unlike most any other B&W film. Give it a try!
| |
EFKE25 IS SHIT. I lost a hell of a lot to that bizzare-grained, almost orthograhic film.
I personally love panF(or arista pro 50).
| |
Stuff I use:
- Provia 100F, 400F -- fine grain slide film, accurate colors, great film for scanning
- Fortepan/Berger any speed -- pretty grainy B&W but has a nice old tech look and a ridiculously large range (17-18 stops). Give it 1/2 - 2/3 stops more exposure than your meter recommends for best results.
- Maco IR 820c -- Nice IR film, get an opaque IR filter or a gel like Ilford SFX.
- Ilford HP5+ -- less grain than the fortepan, but more expensive
Stuff I avoid:
- Any T-MAX stuff. Grain structure is weird and it has very little range compared to older tech B&W.
- Elite Chrome has cruddy color reproduction and pretty obscene grain/dye structure. In general I don't like Kodak's current slide film offerings.
I don't do much color print film.
| |
Posted by msb
EFKE25 IS SHIT. I lost a hell of a lot to that bizzare-grained, almost orthograhic film.
|
You obviously made a "bizzare" mistake processing it. Don't blame the film when that happens, unless you were a victim of a quality control issue.
[last edit 6/6/2006 3:25 AM by Myelin - edited 1 times]
| |
E6: Provia 100. That's all, that's it. I've tried everything I could try over the last 10 years, and there's no such thing as a perfect-for-everything chrome film, but this one comes damn close for me. I've been known to occasionally shoot 400 iso as well, but only on 35mm, and only when I absolutely have to.
C41: Haven't shot a roll in maybe 4 or 5 years, no idea what's good and what's not.
BW: FP4 Plus, Delta 100 when I feel like throwing money away (translated as, when I need film, my normal shop is out of stock on FP4 and I don't have time to drive to the other shops). For 35mm street photography, or when I'm in the mood for badass grain, I'll always love Tri-X 400, but then I went to school for photojournalism, so, y'know, I'm pre-programmed to like that high contrast, extra grainy shit film that I can bulk roll for $35/20 rolls of 36.
*Please note that these bw choices are also based on me not having time to develop my own film, and I don't trust the lab to do much other than standard Kodak/Ilford stuff. Purists, don't hate, at least I still print my own bw in an actual darkroom.
/2 cents.
yep. | |
Posted by Myelin
You obviously made a "bizzare" mistake processing it. Don't blame the film when that happens, unless you were a victim of a quality control issue.
|
no, I did not make a mistake. I have gotten this on several occasions, months apart. I had a roll of panF in the mose recent batch, and that came out fine. Diafine may not be the best developer for it, but that does not explain the grain structure. The grain is what I would describe as "worms" al wrapped together. In addition the the muddy "worms", Straight lines of grain develop in places. NO, they are not scratches. I will get a sample shortly.
You use this film?
| |
Posted by msb
no, I did not make a mistake. I have gotten this on several occasions, months apart. I had a roll of panF in the mose recent batch, and that came out fine. Diafine may not be the best developer for it, but that does not explain the grain structure. The grain is what I would describe as "worms" al wrapped together. In addition the the muddy "worms", Straight lines of grain develop in places. NO, they are not scratches. I will get a sample shortly.
You use this film?
|
Yes. I've been using it for years.
I pre-wash then develop it in Rodinol 1:25 for 5 minutes, agitating frequently.
[last edit 6/7/2006 2:45 AM by Myelin - edited 1 times]
| |
yeah, rodinal is the next developer I am going to try. Freestyle sells it.
anyway, here is a high res, note the grain and the lines. I am sure the camera is casuing the lines...but no other film does that. I still find the grain structure to be rather harsh and unpleasant. http://deltablack.d3vc0n.com/sad.jpg
so I don't take this thread too off course, may I suggest arista films (freestylephoto.biz...again) as a replacement for brand name stuff. They reproduce the emulsions, and sell them for much much less. I can shoot panF for $.60/36 exposures.
http://www.digital...pecial/arista.html
I like Fuji 64T for night shots, but it tends to be pricey.
| |
WOW!
Yes, I would look at the backing plate as a possible culprit, with a possibility that the backing paper on Efke films is less capable of protecting from whatever impression the (stipled?) backing plate might be causing on the film.
Very odd, in any case. Good luck with Rodinal....
| |
I also like the Efke/Adox KB25, but unless you are going to process it yourself, I wouldn't try it at just any Lab. If you Bring your stuff to a lab try the PANF50.
HP5, and FP4 are also fine and a little faster, may or may not require a tripod unlike KB25.
Another inexpensive film I've had luck with is the J&C CHS100. It also processes well in the Kodak D76, wich you'll find most labs using.
I have to agree with everyone else on the Provia, well worth the money over Sensia. I have never used any Kodak Slide film.
| |
I used to like Provia, but then I tried Astia.
Viva la Astia!
I like low-contrast films, though. For printing I can always pump the color saturation in PS and make Astia look more like Provia.
And if you want the really punchy colors and don't mind its very limited tonal range, Velvia is OK too.
For black and white...
HP5 is nice. FP4 is maybe nicer. Pan-F is also very nice. XP2 is wonderful as well if you're not an anti-C41 crusader. Process the traditional black and white stuff in DD-X. It's good.
Kodak's black and white films are filled with yucky contrast. They can mostly go to hell. The newer Tri-X isn't so horrible for scanning and it will work in a pinch.
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits | |
| I used to like Provia, but then I tried Astia. |
I like Astia for sunny outdoor stuff sometimes, but can't be bothered to keep two brands of E6 in my camera bags. Besides, I find Provia loses a bit of contrast with longer exposures indoors anyways. Plus I like the blue shadows.
As for Velvia, I've never had any other film with blown-out colours, rather than blown-out highlights - as in the colours in flowers on an overcast day were so saturated that all the detail was lost. It looked like a roll of images from the second day of a beginner's photoshop class. Weird stuff.
Back on-topic:
For those on here that use the lesser-known bw film, what's the attraction over traditional Ilford/Kodak? Just curious, since I was reading a thread on the apug forum about how people were randomly getting Efke film that was marked 100 iso, but was actually 25. Also something about how it was rebranded Lucky? Just asking questions, cause I've never tried it out, but a lot of people seem to swear by it, even though they seem to have serious quality control issues.
yep. | |
As you know, each B&W film has its own characteristics. In the case of Efke, it is an old school emulsion and its tonality is unique. I do not consider it to be a "budget" or "economy" film, but rather a speciality film. Either you love it or hate it. In the case of Lucky film, I think those stories about it being re-badged Efke/Adox is a bunch of B.S. Lucky film is a Chinese product. I've never tried it but I don't think it's price is low enough to take any chances. I can only assume that quality control might be an issue with Lucky, but have yet to run into any Q.C. issues with Efke.
| |
I think what was said in the other forum was that the Efke was rebranded Lucky, not the other way around...anyway, if you're curious, the thread I mentioned is here:
http://www.apug.or...thread.php?t=28173
Maybe I'll get a roll of every bw film I can find, and shoot the same image at the same location through the same lens, and figure out the difference that way. I do have 6 Nikon bodies available at the moment... Does Efke or any other not-so-common film prefer specialty developer, or can I get away with using T-Max (or D76) developer?
yep. | |
Great Great! I will look for FP4 and HP5 and some Efke/Adox to start off. I just wanted to know if there were any good online stores to buy these films? My local camera dealer has some Ilford stuff but it's very limited... Unless I want shitty Kokdak Gold fun saver 200!!!
"Toyota vehicles are marketed to people who would be more excited about getting a new fridge than a new car I think." -Bandi | |
Posted by mortimer
I think what was said in the other forum was that the Efke was rebranded Lucky, not the other way around...anyway, if you're curious, the thread I mentioned is here:
http://www.apug.or...thread.php?t=28173
Maybe I'll get a roll of every bw film I can find, and shoot the same image at the same location through the same lens, and figure out the difference that way. I do have 6 Nikon bodies available at the moment... Does Efke or any other not-so-common film prefer specialty developer, or can I get away with using T-Max (or D76) developer?
|
I'll check this Efke=Lucky thread out, but only out of curiousity. I would have a hard time believing either is a re-branding of the other.
I haven't tried any other developers because, quite frankly, Rodinal has been so damn reliable. You can try the "Massive Developing Chart" for other possibilities though.
| |
They aren't "discount" dealers, but B&H and Adorama are two good online photo gear stores.
| |
Alright l am a bit late into this thread but hasn't anybody here used scala?
I mean this is the shit l think when it comes to b+w.
I am eager to hear from anyone else who has shot this type of film....
Provia 100 rocks too!
-niv
international explorer...
Badger badger badger badger badger MUSHROOM mushroom! | |
Posted by nivelo
Alright l am a bit late into this thread but hasn't anybody here used scala?
I mean this is the shit l think when it comes to b+w.
I am eager to hear from anyone else who has shot this type of film....
Provia 100 rocks too!
|
I have several rolls of expired Scala. I have the first roll of it in my Olympus XA and I'm using it for dorky silly pics of people. I plan to send it off for DR5 processing when I'm done since there aren't many labs left that do Scala (and because i've heard so many good things about DR5).
Provia 100f is nice, but I like Astia 100f better.
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits |
Add a poll to this thread
This thread is one of your Favourites. Click to make normal.Click to make this thread a Favourite.
| This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private. |
Powered by AvBoard AvBoard version 1.5 alpha
Page Generated In: 78 ms
|
|
Ethics
